Description
Book SynopsisThe Roman Empire had a rich and multifaceted visual culture, which was often variegated due to the sprawling geography of its provinces. In this remarkable work of scholarship, a group of international scholars has come together to find alternative ways to discuss the nature and development of the art and archaeology of the Roman provinces. The result is a collection of nineteen compelling essays-accompanied by carefully curated visual documentation, seven detailed maps, and an extensive bibliography-and organized around the four major themes of provincial contexts, tradition and innovation, networks and movements, and local accents in an imperial context. Easy assumptions about provincial life in Rome-from what makes a province to how they interacted with metropolises-give way to more complicated stories. Similarities and divergences in local and regional responses to Rome appear, but not always in predictable places and in far from predictable patterns.The authors dismiss entrenched barriers between art and archaeology, center and provinces, even "good art" and "bad art," extending their observations well beyond the empire's boundaries, and examining phenomena, sites, and monuments not often found in books about Roman art history or archaeology. The book thus functions to encourage continued critical engagement with how scholars study the material past of the Roman Empire and, indeed, of imperial systems in general.
Trade Review"In addition to the quality of most of the contributions, the value of this collection lies in the fact that different ideas on the same sets of problems are included in a single volume (unfortunately a rare occurrence), which makes the reading of the whole a very stimulating exercise."--Bryn Mawr Classical Review "Beautiful and carefully edited."--Art Newspaper "The contributions to this volume . . . offer nuanced interpretations of provincial visual cultures. . . . This volume is recommended especially for institutional libraries supporting art historians and classicists." --Religious Studies Review
